![]() Minister vows transparency over $600M media fund, defends inclusion of UniforPolitical | 207643 hits | May 26 11:36 am | Posted by: N_Fiddledog Commentsview comments in forum You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
|
This kind of move is where your carbon tax money will really be going. It's fungible so higher prices at the pump will support Progressive socialism in the media. Be happy you're allowed to pay it plebs. Get used to it. One day you will be allowed to support the masters of the Global Socialist Republic with your labor.
Why are we even subsidizing media... any media?
Cos Trudeau thinks the bought and paid for media will sway the electoral.
Stinks.
We're just prolonging the inevitable... personally, I think they should put this money somewhere else... like in my pockets.
Let the market decide who succeeds and who fails. We need to allow the Darwinism must be allowed to claim it's victims. "Bailing" big media out only prolongs the inevitable.
A lot of media companies and more and more fringe media... less and less people who want to read/see that crap they call news. Let's see a purge and maybe the quality of what's left will be better.
Why are we even subsidizing media... any media?
Because we have let Internet monopolies take over the media landscape.
Newspapers were funded by advertising revenue, and the Classified sections. Craigslist/Kijiji have taken the classifieds, and Google/Facebook don't give advertising revenue to the newspapers they scrape.
On top of that, Hedgefunds have bought many media organizations, and are cutting staff and selling assets in order to make a buck. The newspaper era will end with a whimper.
If newspaper health is a measure of democracy, our democracy is in decline: Neil Macdonald
So our right to a 'free press' is being usurped by Google/Facebook/Twitter. Are they going to tell you about the latest information about your local school board? How about that your city council is thinking?
That's why the government is subsidizing media - because they don't have the balls to regulate the internet giants. And, reporters hate this idea too:
The government just made its toxic media bailout plan even worse
That's Capitalism. If you can offer a product better, why shouldn't you? Newspapers have done little or nothing to adapt to the sea change in information technology that has happened over the last 20 years. Adapt or die.
Quite true. But then again, how do you adapt against Google et. al., when you were running with pretty slim margins for the last 60 years? (And Google is perfectly willing to take all your hard work and make advertising revenue from it)
Why not spread a little lettuce to keep the citizens informed?